rocpilefsj
Misguided Angel
Those are some pretty convincing arguments!
Need some advice on flushing?
- Thread starter liveformusic1827
- Start date
cues
Well-Known Member
Oh, for god's sake. Back to school time. Nutrients already are metabolized. It's what makes them Nutrients (elements). It is Photosynthesis that takes the process further.
Nutrients don't magically turn into some harmless sugar-type, smokeable substance once in the plant.
They are transported as negative ions (anions, which most fertilisers are) through the plant by attaching themselves to Cationic (positive) Hydrogen protons. Hence, pH (potential Hydrogen). Roots can even, through hormonal messages sent from within the plant, select which nutrients to uptake.
Once the water and the nutrient ions have been absorbed by the root hair-cells, these are transported across the cell plasma membranes, directly in the cells (symplastically), or between the cells, in intracellular spaces, (apoplastically), to where they are needed. Only then are they used but they STILL remain in the form in which they were in the solution.
Nutrients are elements. Be it Nitrogen, Silicon, Magnesium, Pottassium, Zinc, Calcium, Boron, Phosphoros, Iron, Copper, Mobyldenum or Manganese, they are all ELEMENTS.
ELEMENTS CANNOT BE METABOLISED. Simple, basic,un-arguable fact. This is Schoolboy stuff and frankly, should not even be discussed on a site such as this, where we should all know better. It worries me that such comments are making it through the net and suggests that basic concepts are not being grasped before people are moving on.
Elements cannot be decomposed into any simpler substance or transformed into other chemical element. Also, in our case they are not removed through transpiration through the stomata or magically sent into a fifth dimesion, hence the only way these elements in the plant can be removed is through the water supply via these protons, which can reverse their action and remove elements, depositing them back in the reservoir/soil etc. It's why Hydro growers that flush see the ppm rising on the meter while flushing even though they aren't adding nutes. The plant is dumping the nutes back out.
This is essentially how garden fertilisers made from compost work. It's simply letting all the plant material decompose, leaving the nutrients behind. It's why tree leaves make such good compost. Their roots have been able to extract elements from deep below the soil surface Do you really think these plants magically transform their nutrients into some harmless substance for us to smoke and anything left over transforms itself back into nutrients after composting, ready for our next grow?.
Sure, there are variations of macro-nutes (Nitrogen in Urea, Formaldehyde or Nitrate form for example) which are designed to be slowly converted to an available nutrient but this is mainly about providing some kind of 'slow-release' ability or 'buffering'.
Collodial action (mainly silver) is also another theory which has largely been de-bunked. Chelation (usually iron) is the only method to have been proven of any worth. Further experiments related to providing an ionic/anionic exchange through an electrical charge have so far looked promising but not yet taken up by the mainstream.
To get a greater understanding, I would suggest BEGINNING by looking up Cationic Exchange Capacity of substrates and realising that the same theory continues within the plant. This is too small a place to explain but it is all linked. I used to think of it as magnetism (opposites attract, similars repel) to make it simpler to understand. As you explore further, you will also come to understand the importance and theory of pH.
Many people claim growing is an art. It isn't, it's a science.
Choosing whether you want buds that weigh 10% more but contain unwanted elements or cleaner buds is your choice but the scientific fact is that you can't have both.
Ironically, I have often wondered about the possibility of over-fertilising (or salting the water) before harvest to intentionally produce a hypertonic state (when a cell would have an negative internal osmotic pressure) to reduce drying time and draw elements and H2O from the plant tissue.
Finally, for those that don't agree with my thinking, please feel free to pick holes. Please back it up with a scientific explanation though. I suggest that 'My mate didn't flush and we all got wasted ok' is of little use if we want to truly understand the process. We are all here to learn and help each other.
I apologise for my tone, but I get annoyed with people who claim to know what they are doing when they obviously are of the 'stick it in some soil and it will grow' brigade, without having any real understanding and coming out with absurd quotes such as 'Metabolized Nutrients' (a bit like saying breathable air, drinkable water or edible bread) when they obviously do not understand even the basic theory.
1) Back to school time. Nutrients already are metabolized. It's what makes them Nutrients (elements).
2) Nutrients are elements. Be it Nitrogen, Silicon, Magnesium, Pottassium, Zinc, Calcium, Boron, Phosphoros, Iron, Copper, Mobyldenum or Manganese, they are all ELEMENTS.
ELEMENTS CANNOT BE METABOLISED.
3) This is Schoolboy stuff and frankly, should not even be discussed on a site such as this, where we should all know better.
4) the only way these elements in the plant can be removed is through the water supply via these protons, which can reverse their action and remove elements, depositing them back in the reservoir/soil etc.
5) It's why Hydro growers that flush see the ppm rising on the meter while flushing even though they aren't adding nutes. The plant is dumping the nutes back out.
6) This is essentially how garden fertilisers made from compost work. It's simply letting all the plant material decompose, leaving the nutrients behind.
7) Do you really think these plants magically transform their nutrients into some harmless substance for us to smoke and anything left over transforms itself back into nutrients after composting, ready for our next grow?.
Sure, there are variations of macro-nutes (Nitrogen in Urea, Formaldehyde or Nitrate form for example) which are designed to be slowly converted to an available nutrient but this is mainly about providing some kind of 'slow-release' ability or 'buffering'.
9) Chelation (usually iron) is the only method to have been proven of any worth.
10) Further experiments related to providing an ionic/anionic exchange through an electrical charge have so far looked promising but not yet taken up by the mainstream.
11) Many people claim growing is an art. It isn't, it's a science.
12) Ironically, I have often wondered about the possibility of over-fertilising (or salting the water) before harvest to intentionally produce a hypertonic state (when a cell would have an negative internal osmotic pressure) to reduce drying time and draw elements and H2O from the plant tissue.
13) Finally, for those that don't agree with my thinking, please feel free to pick holes. Please back it up with a scientific explanation though.
14) We are all here to learn and help each other.
15) I apologise for my tone, but
16) I get annoyed with people who claim to know what they are doing when they obviously do not understand even the basic theory.
Hi to all fellow pottyheads. I don´t usually write to forums but the above post just forced me to sign in. Especially quote no. 13) inspired me. Soo... let´s pick´em holes...
1) No they are not. Not all at least. Major amount of N-fertilizers are made from ammonia produced through Haber-Bosch process. If you don´t know what metabolism or metabolized mean, check it out. The explanations of these words are hidden in dictionaries. Also, you seem to suggest that "element" and "nutrient" are synonyms. They are not. Another dictionary dig for you.
2) Now, when we compare quotes one and two we find out that: nutrients are elements that have been metabolized AND a "Simple, basic,un-arguable fact" is that they cannot be. At this point your logic escapes the boundaries of reason.
3) This really pissed me off. In this section you (after ousting the organic fertilizers 1 and 2) boldly claim to be so learned and intelligent that discussion shouldn´t even exist. If this is "schoolboy stuff" for you, please tell us what school you went. People should be able to avoid sending their kids to it.
4) Utter gibberish. However I would like to know what "these (first time mentioned) protons" are and what is their "action" they "can reverse" (as if they had a will).
5) Plant´s not dumping shite. Flushing is killing the plants and their roots are decomposing and melting into water. There is also a physical phenomenon called "evaporation" which reduces the H2O (water)-content of the reservoir while leaving the salts in. (yes, if your flusher-friends don´t use distilled water there are salts in it). Another scientific explanation for higher TDS-readings is that they changed their meters worn-out batteries to fresh ones. Far more plausible explanation than "function reversing protons".
6 , 7) Read together and weep.
Well, urea is slow (when diluted and watered into soil) but extremely fast if foliar-fed. (Emergency measure in severe N-deficiency. Not really necessary but if someone wants to try it, don´t go over 0,5g/l). Nitrates on the other hand are THE form of N that plants take up most efficiently. Minor flaws but FORMALDEHYDE? EMBALMING AGENT??? CH2OH???? Where is the N in that? Earlier you told that elements cant change into others but clearly the laws of physics are altered again. Or do you have a particle accelerator in your grow room? That might do the trick...9) Has it been proven scientifically? In gardening? Chelation is a therapy which removes heavy metals... from human patients. It makes those metals movable and they are removed from the body diluted in URINE produced by the KIDNEYS. Plants, however, seldom (if ever) have been proven to possess kidneys or to produce urine.
10) When flushing is not enough... ELECTROCUTE YOUR BUDS! Now we are really getting somewhere.
11) Growing is gardening. It is whatever the gardener makes it to be. Marijuana has been grown for a pretty long time without science. The true secret of MJ-growing is: IT´S A BLOODY TOUGH PLANT AND CAN TAKE A LOT OF ABUSE AND STILL DELIVER. But even MJ can´t survive flushing.
12) Yes. I can believe you have.
13) Hope you are satisfied. However, I cannot really say I disagree with your thinking. I just don´t believe such process exists.
14) Are we?
15) I most certainly don´t.
16) Amen to that.
P.S.
WHAT FLUSHING DOES: Saying it starves the plants is an understatement. It actually stops all plant metabolism once the micro nutrients in roots and stem are sucked into growing points and used. This means that the nitrates and other macro-nutes that cells MAY VERY WELL have in them will not be used as building blocks of the plant but will still be there when dried. Just the opposite of what was wanted. (yes, Mr. Harrekin. You had that (only) one wrong. Nutes can build up). To avoid this DO NOT OVERFERTILIZE!!! USE EC-METER!!! Also note that for example nitrates can build up even if not overfertilized. Mn-deficiency is enough to to this, so use fertilizers with enough micros in right ratios. And don´t overdo it. Crops HAVE been poisoned with micro nutrients.
P.P.S
Youtube is full of grow-videos ending with "proper flushing". See yourself how fine crops wither and wilt under this exorcism-ritual. And listen how the happy flushers glorify the resulting reek of death and decay as the "fine smell of plants pushing the last resins to precious buds."
brewing up
Well-Known Member
when i flushed my plants they started to turn yellow from lack of nutes so i have not flushed since :-/
hellraizer30
Rebel From The North
Lol thats the point for the plants to use up what they have!
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
Except it has no effect on smell or taste, so why starve it?
Cues; just sit there quietly, every single thing you wrote was utter rubbish. The roots can put minerals back into the soil? What an amazing discovery you've made, you might wanna tell the scientific community that, cos I'm pretty sure it'd be the first they heard of it!
I see the "Porcelin Patrol" are making another stab at trying to make sense of why they think wasting water makes their plants taste better...keep trying folks.
hellraizer30
Rebel From The North
@HK You know the only time i see you post is in a flushing thread! Lol I dont think i have ever seen you post a pic of
Anything you have grown! Theres no debate on weither to flush or not, either you believe in flushing or you dont!
Your like jevehovahs witness man claiming there shit dont stink! Yah i flush the toilet so what! At least I show that
Im a real grower lol
Anything you have grown! Theres no debate on weither to flush or not, either you believe in flushing or you dont!
Your like jevehovahs witness man claiming there shit dont stink! Yah i flush the toilet so what! At least I show that
Im a real grower lol
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
Why would it? The fertilisers are broken down to undifferentiated units (ie. N is N regardless of brand) before the roots absorb them and then combined with other elements to make plant structures.
The fish juice might make your medium smell like crap, but it won't effect the smell or the taste of the buds.
Damn you made me get out my Jorge Cervantes medical grow bible.
"Avoid the taste of organic or chemical fertilizers in harvested buds by flushing with plain water or a clearing solution to remove any residuals and chemicals that have built up in soil or plant foliage. Ten to fourteen days before harvesting, flush the garden with distilled water or water treated with reverse osmosis. Use a clearing solution such as Final Flush if you have to use plain tap use plain tap water that contains dissolved solids. Some growers fertilize until three to four days before harvest and use a clearing solution to remove fertilizer residues. Apply this water just as you would apply nutrient solution. Always let at least ten percent, preferably more, drain out the bottom of containers. If using a recirculating hydroponic system, change the water after the first four to six days of application. Continue to top off the reservoir with "clean" water. Do not water for one or two days before harvest. The soil should be fairly dry, but not dry enough the plants wilt. This will speed up the drying process."
Who do I believe!!
"Avoid the taste of organic or chemical fertilizers in harvested buds by flushing with plain water or a clearing solution to remove any residuals and chemicals that have built up in soil or plant foliage. Ten to fourteen days before harvesting, flush the garden with distilled water or water treated with reverse osmosis. Use a clearing solution such as Final Flush if you have to use plain tap use plain tap water that contains dissolved solids. Some growers fertilize until three to four days before harvest and use a clearing solution to remove fertilizer residues. Apply this water just as you would apply nutrient solution. Always let at least ten percent, preferably more, drain out the bottom of containers. If using a recirculating hydroponic system, change the water after the first four to six days of application. Continue to top off the reservoir with "clean" water. Do not water for one or two days before harvest. The soil should be fairly dry, but not dry enough the plants wilt. This will speed up the drying process."
Who do I believe!!
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
Believe who you wish brother, but my question is do you trust the person Cervantes plagurised to put that in the book? He openly admits he copies it off other people.
Final Flush is a joke btw, it's 95.5% water and 4.5% glucose+fructose. How does that help?
(Dilute sugar water is a classic placebo used in the medical field btw)
hellraizer30
Rebel From The North
@dr lg Dude this arguement will go over and over like a bad record, just do what you feel is right!
scroglodyte
Well-Known Member
i want try pulling a plant from its medium, securing it into a 5 gal bucket with DW about 3 days before the chop, and compare. maybe i'll bubble the water. she's gonna drink, and there won't be any nutrients in DW. i just like to experiment.
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
If you want to submerge the roots do it for 5 days, not 3 and dont bubble the water. It causes the plant to ferment any starches (which are the true reason for bad tasting,burning weed) by blocking off the plants oxygen supply. Because it can't respire as normal it consumes it's complex carb stores. It is a documented success, you'll have to top up the water tho.
I flush and I let my plants dry out fully. Don't believe all the flushing hype I don't. Flush a plant and dont flush a plant. Try them. I didnt flush using organics (it tasted fine) I didnt flush using chems (it was a little harsher than normal nothing noticable to anyone but the grower).
Now when I flush it tastes a bit better and smells a bit better. When I starve N towards the end it tastes even better and smokes even cleaner. I would say starving N towards the end of flower has just as big an impact on end product as flushing.
Try both methods, flush don't flush. Try flushing for a week and try two. I currently flush for 3-14 days dependent on the nutrients used and the look of the plants.
and when I cut my plants are droopy from lack of water.
I hope this helps but its just my opinion. Form your own.
Now when I flush it tastes a bit better and smells a bit better. When I starve N towards the end it tastes even better and smokes even cleaner. I would say starving N towards the end of flower has just as big an impact on end product as flushing.
Try both methods, flush don't flush. Try flushing for a week and try two. I currently flush for 3-14 days dependent on the nutrients used and the look of the plants.
and when I cut my plants are droopy from lack of water.
I hope this helps but its just my opinion. Form your own.
From growing forums you can find some valid info (like Mine
) but a lot of it is pure X-files-stuff. So the correct answer to your question is: TRUST NO 1!!! If you want to became a truly great grower you have to be willing to learn some biology, some chemistry, some physics, some mathematics and all the little stuff that can only be learned by trial and error and growing and growing and growing... A good start would be understanding the many roles different nutrients play in plant metabolism.
Growing is gardening. If you want good information on gardening, go to gardening sites and learn the gardeners ways. Don´t listen to potheads (yes, including me) if they are trying to sound like experts. They most likely are not. I certainly am not... but i do know what it would take to become one.
Zealot
Member
because they're gonna get cancer anyway...
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
Yeah but tobacco is smooth and doesn't taste like chemicals without a flush, AND with tobacco you're smoking leaf which is one of the plants biggest nutrient stores.
ddimebag
Active Member
has anyone bothered to mention the nutes and medium they were using when comparing flushed plants to non-flushed plants? That would make a world of difference.
To put in a good word for flushing, flushed weed doesn't fizzle and make sparks when you burn it (an easy way to see if the weed you just bought was flushed), and when chemical fertilizers were used up until harvest, the smoke would have a slight chemical taste. This is not second hand experience, so i don't want to hear any of that "noob-believed-what-some-idiot-told-him" crap...
I should also mention that the old-school Columbian Gold old hippes rave about owes much of its unique qualities to the pre- and post-harvest techniques used by the growers, one of which involves wrapping metal wire around the base of the stem to gradually cut off the nutrient and water supply soon before harvest time. (not first hand experience, obviously, but I have read this information on a number of websites, and also hear it from a local sativa fan, who is generally well-informed)
To put in a good word for flushing, flushed weed doesn't fizzle and make sparks when you burn it (an easy way to see if the weed you just bought was flushed), and when chemical fertilizers were used up until harvest, the smoke would have a slight chemical taste. This is not second hand experience, so i don't want to hear any of that "noob-believed-what-some-idiot-told-him" crap...
I should also mention that the old-school Columbian Gold old hippes rave about owes much of its unique qualities to the pre- and post-harvest techniques used by the growers, one of which involves wrapping metal wire around the base of the stem to gradually cut off the nutrient and water supply soon before harvest time. (not first hand experience, obviously, but I have read this information on a number of websites, and also hear it from a local sativa fan, who is generally well-informed)